FMQ: IN WHICH ANNABEL PLAYS MATRON AND ALEX SAYS "YES"!

The first question about what the FM was going to do with the rest of his day was answered with some excellent news. Alex Salmond was to make an announcement with executives from Amazon of 950 new full-time Amazon jobs to Scotland. Great news.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00x98fj/First_Ministers_Question_Time_13_01_2011

Policing and Fire Services are hugely important issues, and most people would think it was cheap and unpleasant to make, or try to make political capital out of them, but the sickening idiot Gray did just that. While usually I can laugh at his stupidity, and his cack handedness, today I’m just sickened by him. I can’t even be bothered to call him by his pet name. He’s a buffoon, and an unpleasant one at that and a completely useless opposition leader.

He pressed for the FM to give a response now to the future of policing and fire services and bemoaned the fact that the government is consulting. He wanted action. Just do it. If this is what he would do in government, then it would be as well to keep him out. He complained that Alex’s position on the matter had changed over the last few months. He complained that Alex should show leadership and make a decision and that “this is daft stuff”. Definitely FM material. NOT

All of this of course gave Alex the opportunity to give him a little lesson in what running a country is about. We all know about Labour dictatorship. We had plenty of that from Gray’s friends in London. Alex prefers to govern by consensus. There must be changes. Thanks to cuts in funding from London, partly due to incompetent running of the UK economy by Gordon Brown, the status quo is not an option. But the number of forces cannot be decided without knowing facts, and weighing potential consequences.

It was the most sickening display of stupidity I’ve heard from the idiot yet.

And so to Annabel, who reminded Alex that it was Conservative policies which had put 1000 extra officers on the streets! She made a Party Political Broadcast committing the Tories to a pledge to keep them there for the next 4 years. Would, she asked, the FM meet that commitment?

“Yes”, said he, and sat down to good humoured laughter all round, except presumably Labour who, in her question, had been given a drubbing by Annabel. “They had no plans then and they have no plans now”, she said.

She reminded Alex that she had had to tweak him back into line when he was naughty... (hmmmm, I’m not sure all of you are ready for this kind of stuff, especially, when he replied, saying that he felt a bit like he’d been pulled into line by Matron.) There was an agreement that on Law and Order there had been much co-operation with both the Tories and the Liberals. What a relief that Annabel has a sense of humour and an IQ level above that of Humpty Dummy.

And so to wee Tavish, who was also, quite rightly for this IS important, asking more questions about policing. He really just gave Alex the opportunity to reiterate the importance of consulting widely before taking a decision, rather than going gung ho into it as Iain Gray presumably would were he ever the FM. Tavish pointed out that Labour had tried to make changes in England and had to turn back due to not having thought out, or costed how it would be done. Alex assured him that he would not be using Labour’s blueprint.

And so to supplementaries on company closures, the impact of VAT and fuel duty, flu and legal aid.

Pic 1: “It’s OK Alex, that’s just the starter; the real meal is to follow”. Pic 2: A picture of Iain Gray’s brain embedded in soap. Can’t see anything much there. Pic3: In case the Tories are stupid enough to dump Auntie Annabel, she’s got another job as a train driver... )ic 4: On yer bike Tavish...

U-TURN IF YOU WANT TO: OH THANK YOU I SHALL

Sooooooooo...as I understand it, when Dave was in opposition he thought that the SNP’s idea of a sliding petrol tax in line with the ever changing price of oil was a good idea. It offered the motorist some stability. So when the price of oil, and therefore petrol, went up, the tax would be adjusted downwards so that the Treasury, whilst still making more money than they had anticipated, would not “make a killing”. And the poor motorist would manage to fill his car.

Then when he got in to Downing Street he did a U-turn on that policy. Well no surprise there, there are a bunch of U-turns to chose from.

Then he was put on the spot by Andrew Marr on his Sunday morning programme and he kinda did a U-turn again: “ It is something I have asked the Treasury to look at because when you are filling up the car and it's £1.30 a litre, it's incredibly painful for families up and down the country and I understand that." quoth he.

Love it. Can I tell you Dave, that it’s painful for single people, couples, families and anyone else at £1.30 a litre. Families have no exclusive right to the pain. It will soon be cheaper to use Vodka to fill up your car “up and down the bloody country" (where did they get that phrase), and possibly across it as well!!!

He went on to blame Labour. It was their tax and the government wasn't able to stop it. What? Even after two budgets Dave?

Anyway, fear not, he made another U-turn yesterday and said that he didn’t want to get people’s hopes up....

Ha ha ha ha ha ha . Get people’s hopes up.... I think not Dave, we have abandoned hope, all who have entered here. Well, except of course for the royal family, who seem to be doing very nicely out of this government. (Sir david Cameron, maybe?)

U-turns seem to be his stock in trade, but this is a hum dinger, as my granny would say. A U-turn, on his U-turn on the U-turn on the pledge... Only a highly trained U-turner could do that without getting very dizzy and falling off their polo pony, and poor old Mrs Thatcher must have fallen off her broomstick.

So don’t worry Dave. It was a pledge before the election, we expected you to break it. Our hopes never left the ground.

So what was today’s U-turn?

SOMEONE IS HAPPY THE TORIES ARE IN POWER

The royals must be delighted to have the Tories in power for, while bad things are happening daily to people like us, it has been unmitigated joy at the House of Windsor’s house (if you get my meaning)...well I should say houses really, for there are many.

Yes, Dave has rained down (see that: clever use of rained/reigned) benefit after benefit on the family to which he is, I’m told, distantly related. But then, why not? After all, the story goes that when Dave decided that he wanted to be in politics, and the natural party for his sort was the Tories, they showed little interest in putting him forward for a seat. Well, they wouldn’t. Unlike most politicos, Wee Willie Hague for example, he had shown no interest in politics, or in the Tories, at Oxford. His politics, such as they were, were right wing, but they would be. I mean if you had his money wouldn’t you want to keep your hands on it?

Anyway, I ramble. The point is that the Tories weren’t interested in Davie, until one day the Tory chairman got a call from someone at the palace. No, not her, don’t be silly. It was one of her flunkies, but a top flunky it must have been for, lo and behold, the next thing is that Dave is an MP.

So it’s payback time Cammy. And the payback has been big. First the chancellor announced, hidden at the end of the budget, that the Civil List was to be scrapped and a new system of payment for royals initiated. Of course no one imagined that, in a budget so full of bad news for “ordinary” people, that this would mean a large pay rise for the Queen. Apparently Charlie, who is at the bottom of everything avaricious and profligate in the royal family has been writing to ministers for 20 years trying to get them to do this. All have resisted until Georgie who was a pushover and tent folded right away.

So next, it appears that “one” (Charlie) is fed up with one’s private business being known by all and sundry. So...letters, emails and documents relating to the monarch, Charlie and Willie will no longer be disclosed even if they are in the public interest. Yes, you read that right. Even if it is in the public interest!

Again this was tacked onto plans called (ironically) “opening up public bodies to public scrutiny". No one noticed its inclusion as “added protection" for the royals in the small print. You couldn’t make it up.

And now, when unions on the Tube have threatened a strike on April 29 when William and Kate are to be married, Dave’s spokesman has blamed the unions for undermining a day of national celebration. Celebration? What?

His rail minister said “most people” are looking forward celebrating the wedding. Again, what? Most people don’t care squat. I know not one single person who is interested.

Half the population doesn’t give a toss for a start. Guys may be appy to have a day off, but after that....pfffffffff?
And do women want to spend the day gazing at what other women, with a million times (literally) more to spend on clothes, are wearing. Dave is happy because it’s just before local government elections in England, which they want to win. Of course he’ll get a free feed at the palace afterwards.

So never mind all these people being thrown out of work, cold, hungry. We MUSTN’T have the royal wedding ruined... (like they will be using the Tube!!!)

Well, it's an ill wind......

Pic 1: “How awfully clever of you Charles, you doubled the money and the prols aren’t allowed to know how we spend it. Your father always said you’d come in useful for something if we kept you long enough. It's just a pity it took you 20 years to do.” Pic 2: “Sorry I’m late ma’am, the damned tubes are off.” Pic 3: “Ah yes, this is one’s garden; you paid for it, you stock it, you maintain it. Splendid, isn’t it? Take a good look; you’ll not see it again.” Pic 4: The Tent Folder General, hiding with a friend.

"AUTHORITY" EXISTS NOW FOR ITS OWN BENEFIT

I was looking through the blogs this morning and noticed that “Calling England” has a roundup of what’s in the Sunday papers. I’d only got a few lines down and was attracted to an article in the Mail (yes, the Mail on Sunday!!!), by Richard North.

It’s a long time since I felt such empathy, and for that empathy to come from an article in the hateful Mail on Sunday is, for me, quite eye opening.

Although his article is based on England, the story is the same in Scotland. He points out, that politicians, local authority “executives”, MPs, big business, indeed almost everyone and thing that crosses your path, no longer seems to have any interest in actually serving you. Their one motto in common seems to be “Let’s make money”.

We will all have stories of how we tried to deal with a big company, or with the local council, or with government, and found ourselves knocked back and stymied at every turn because no one cares. Everything seems to be done for the benefit of the management; nothing for the customer. And the more that we are described as customers (hospitals, where we used to be patients; jobcentres, where we used to be clients; councils where we used to be taxpayers), the less we are treated as such.

Once upon a time you could walk into a BT office and sort out service problems. Now it all has to be done by phone, which is, as I found out a few years ago when my phone line and internet service went down, rather difficult when you HAVE NO PHONE.

Eventually, of course, I contacted them on someone else’s phone, and when I pointed out the problems to the call centre person with, to me, an indecipherable northern English accent, she listened till I’d finished, ignored all I had said, and told me that I had to check some things myself. If they sent someone out there would be a £60 charge...

And if I cancelled my contract, there would also be a charge.

I understood that privatization was designed to provide us with competition which would lead to cheaper and better service. Wrong. It leads to people making more money and was designed to do such.

It’s the same with councils. Don’t try to get them to do anything for you. I’ve failed miserably. My emails are replied to with platitudes and no action. But people in management in the local council are scared of no one. It is difficult to sack anyone in the local authority, and once they are at management level almost nothing will budge them, and probably even then they will leave within with a hefty compensation package. They are compensated for being crap.

Try to get Dundee’s Director of Planning to do something about the fact that double parking in your street makes it impassable to fire engines and sometimes to ambulances. It’s his responsibility but does he give a damn? Does he hell? He’s got his OBE so he’s sorted.

They work on the basis that you aren’t “allowed” to see or talk to them face to face, and that after a while most people get fed up with sending emails or letters to no avail. As for Councillors...are they afraid of them? No. Councillors can’t do anything to them.

And these are but a few of the issues that we are having with "them". The postal office that introduced a new computer system in November (yes November), the bus company, based in Birmingham which cuts a complete service in the evening on one route and runs empty buses within minutes of each other on another, and tells you that you can easily take two buses to replace the one that they have cancelled.

It’s high time we made it clear to “authority” that it is US who are in authority and not them.

And if that means upturning a few egos and crushing them, so be it.

Do you have any stories like this? ... I bet you do.

MORE SLIPS THIS WEEK THAN THE BLACK RUN AT KLOSTERS

For a long time the Tories have been waging war on the number of Quangos that the British state appears to need, and so before the election, and indeed since the election, much has been made of the plan to have yet another ‘bonfire of quangos’.

The strange thing about this is that they used pretty much the same words as the Labour government used when they came to power 14 years ago.

I wonder if the Tories stopped for even a second to ask themselves why it was that Labour had made no progress whatsoever in the matter...

Well, either they didn’t or they thought that they were simply cleverer than Labour (an easy mistake to make), for, on taking up his post as a minister at the Cabinet Office, Francis Maude set about the quasi autonomous non-governmental organisations with his hatchet and dust pan and shovel.

No planning, no preparation, just right in there with the axe...

So it must have come as a bit of a blow to the poor old fella when he read the report of a parliamentary committee, with a predominance of Conservatives and chaired by Conservative Bernard Jenkins, which said that the whole thing had been botched and badly managed, and that rather than saving money (Call Me had promised savings of a billion a year), the whole thing was likely to cost money.

The truth is that most of what is done by quangos, is done so because it needs to be done, and it is best not done by Whitehall, directly under the control of politicians. So, in setting light to them, it is necessary to ensure that the essential parts of their work be taken over by others. Effectively many of the changes made by Maudie, amalgamated quangos, or took them back under the wing of a government department (which a few months down the line will mean calls of unfairness, partiality and political interference). Even his own side thing he’s a pratt. Ooooops. Liam Byrne, his shadow, said: "I like a plate of soup at lunchtime", as if anyone cared.

Now, on the subject of pratts, I seem to recall that the then shadow chancellor, Porgy Georgie Osborne was outraged at the bonuses given to bankers under the last regime, after the banks brought the country to its knees. Indeed the deputy prime minister reiterated Mr Osborne’s sentiments as recently as last week.

So it must be pretty embarrassing for both of them that Robert Peston is reporting that the banks will make SMALL reductions in the payments this year, and that much of the bonuses will be paid in shares which cannot be immediately cashed. (This is to encourage longer term strategies where trading is concerned: bankers will, it is hoped be encouraged to think long term, because their shares can go up or down). However, the cunning old sausages have got round that little problem by giving themselves 50% increases in fixed pay... so if the banks do crash again because of their stupidity, the bankers will have most of it stashed in salary. Even less reason to think about the future. "They are looking for some words from us that prove that the negotiations have achieved something," said a senior banker. "I fear however that there may be more spin than substance to what we say."

Well Gideon... remind us, what was it you were going to do? Ooooops

PS... then there's daft Nadine! Oooooops.

Pics: (1) Maudie, in a government of knobs, he stands out as a real knob. (2) Georgie is getting to be a chunky wee thing now he’s got all the Treasury money as well as his own. (3) Now this is what Dave does best, dressing up in clothes the rest of us just don’t have. (4) Laim Byrne (no spelling error) He’s not relevant to this story, but boy is he spooky. (5) Mr Peston. Do you think he was a singing teacher in another life? (6) When the words disaster and Tories are in a story you can bet that Mad Nad won’t be far away. The poor old thing’s having another yet fling, now that she’s not got her expenses to keep her warm. Well, she's a bit chav isn't she?

COMPASSION OF HIGHLAND BUILDER SHAMES IDS's DWP

Nineteen year old Elgin lad Kyle Stewart lives in constant agony since he was horrifically burned in a caravan park accident, when a faulty gas cylinder exploded.

Kyle can barely walk or talk, and is unable to feed, dress or bathe himself and getting in and out of bed is particularly excruciating because his arms have been so badly burned and are now just skin and bone. He has had 10 skin grafts since the accident in July. (Can you imagine trying to help someone up when their arms are so horrifically burned?)

His mum wanted to buy him an electrically adjustable bed which would raise him up and let him back down again. So Mrs Stewart applied for a community care grant from the Dept of Work and Pensions so that she could continue to look after him at home, instead of him being in hospital, where they have this kind of bed. (It’s worth remembering that keeping a person in hospital must cost more than £500 a week, at the same time as it causes inconvenience for the family, even more distress for the patient and blocks a bed that could be used for an acute patient.)

So, remembering all that, and that we are all in this together, and that we all have to pull together in these hard times, the Dept of Work and Pensions said NO.

The Press and Journal reported Mrs Stewart and Kyle’s plight and fortunately, within a few hours, someone came up trumps. Highland builder William MacKenzie came forward and donated the £1250 required for a bed for Kyle. Mr MacKenzie, who has a son himself, said that Kyle’s story touched his heart. He reckoned that money was only money; he couldn’t take it with him and you never got anywhere in life through being greedy.

Mr MacKenzie said that what really got him was that the DWP had refused the lad the money.

It gets me too. In the same week as we read this we hear that over half a million pounds had been overpaid in Council Tax Benefit in Dundee in the last 6 months. (Council Tax Benefit is administered by local authorities but paid by the DWP.)

There is no rhyme or reason to the decisions these government departments make, and no explanation was given by the DWP.

It is, however, don’t you think, a great pity that there are not considerably fewer people like the management of the DWP, and a great deal more people like Mr William MacKenzie in the world?

Pic: Kyle before the accident. Now he is covered in bandages.

EXPENSE CLAIMS REAR THEIR UGLY HEADS AGAIN

They really make you laugh do MPs, don't they?

Conservative Roger Gale has said that Ian Kennedy, chairman of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) should consider resigning. He said that the organization is not working and those responsible have got to be replaced.

The Liberal Democrat Conservative Bob Russell has called the organization the worst he has dealt with and described it as ‘not fit for purpose’ (an expression a bit close to home in the mouth of a Libdem, actually in the mouth of an MP).

Amazing! IPSA was put in place only a year ago, by MPs, and it’s not fit for purpose? Already? Well I never.

But the funniest comment came from David Winnick, a member of the equally amusing Labour Party who said: ''The patience of MPs has reached such a state that inevitably there will be changes.'' Goodness, we simply can’t have the patience of MPs being stretched. Whatever next? We’ll be asking them to turn up for work and do what we pay them to do instead of writing books and going on tours, sitting on company boards, practising law, appearing on tv quiz and reality shows, etc.

Ian Kennedy made it absolutely clear he was going nowhere. With the kind of common sense that you rarely hear from people in public life he pointed out that some MPs were finding it difficult to adjust to independent regulation of their expenses claims (having been used to getting whatever they asked for regardless of what they were due).

He said that IPSA was doing the job it was set up to do and there was no way that he would consider fundamental changes to the system of expenses claims that is now in place. He added that the idea of resigning had not occurred to him.

Nor should it.

IPSA may not be running as smoothly as everyone would want, but that’s the way things are when they are set up initially. Every one of us in this badly organized country has to put up with poorly administered, underfunded facilities, waiting in queues, being overlooked, having mistakes made in payments, lack of information, misinformation. Dealing with anyone or anything in “authority” is likely to cause heart attacks and nervous breakdowns.

MPs appear to think that they should be exempt from the hell that they have wished on the rest of us.

Well, does anyone think that they should be?

The prime minister seems to have a weird idea about what the word “independent” means. He promised his backbenchers that if the organization had not made fundamental changes by April something would be done. By whom, Dave? You? How independent would that be, seeing that you’re an MP yourself.

Given what Ian Kennedy has said, it looks like there will be a showdown... and of course the prime minister will win in the short term because he is the prime minister. But in the long term it’s just another nail in these people’s coffins.

When we complain about something set up by parliament being unfit for purpose, nothing happens; when they complain that they can’t claim travel expenses for their children, Cameron changes the rules... Tut tut, bad move. Whatever happened to us all being in it together?

Ian Kennedy reminded us today that it is the public who pay these expenses. Cameron would do well to remember that he can’t hope to get away with using our money to bribe his backbenchers!

''It is not going to be a question of us propping up (another party) but of us insisting on the changes only we advocate'' : Nick Clegg!

Before the General Election in May the Liberals were recording voting intentions in the polls of around 30%. On occasions they were above on occasions below, but they frequently came close second behind the Tories and above the Labour Party.

Most recently they have flat lined at 9% (with an historic low in Wales of 6%).

I suppose we all knew that Nick Clegg was a kind of right-wing Liberal, with a deal in common with David Cameron, extremely rich parents, very good public school, then Oxford, as a right.

But I always had the impression that, even if I didn’t agree with all that he said, his views had been carefully thought out by a razor sharp mind, unlike David Cameron who seemed to have very little of substance to offer in a rather woolly mind, minimal intellect and no real political grounding. Cameron was a Tory because that was what rich boys who went to Eton and Oxford were. Because he had connections with the palace it seemed reasonable that he would go into parliament (with a little push from said palace) and would end up in Cabinet and possibly be prime minister. Clegg, from a similar background, having already worked in both Brussels and Washington and being fluent in several languages ... had though his way into the Liberals, or so it seemed to me.

So what is Clegg’s game?


Even if he truly believes that the Tories’ economic and social policies will, in the long term, improve Britain from a Liberal point of view, and that in five years’ time we will all be thanking the Coalition for delivering us from evil, does he seriously think that this will reflect favourably upon the Liberals?

Here is a man who promised to fight to keep student fees in England at no more than £3,000 pa and who said that to double them to £6,000 would be a disaster, but who oversaw the tripling of fees within 6 months of being elected, to £9,000.

Here is a man who, as the picture showed, berated the Conservatives, whom he suspected of plotting to increase VAT, overseeing the increase in VAT within 7 months of taking office.

Here is a man who said that on voting reform described the AV system proposed by the Gordon Brown as ''a baby step in the right direction'', and said he would not settle for ''a miserable little compromise”, accepting that miserable little compromise when it is offered by the Tories, along with the title of Deputy Prime Minister. What happened, Mr Clegg, to the assertion that the very least the Liberal Democrats would settle for was the Jenkins’ Commission’s AV+ proposals?

And now what is happening with the scrapping of control orders which was a plank of Liberal policy. It seems that Nick has to back down in the face of opposition from lightweight Theresa Wellingtons.

So remind me Nick, what was it that you were insisting on? And how do you think it will feel to be the man who reduced the Liberal numbers in the next Commons to around the same level as Jeremy Thorpe had?

VAT RISE IS PERMANENT: 50% INCOME TAX RATE TEMPORARY

Mr Osborne, back from his estimated £11,000 (over twice the annual retirement pension) holiday in millionaire playboy ski resort Klosters has said that he considers the VAT rise to 20% to be permanent, and has indicated that he would rather reduce income tax rates than reduce VAT, and that the 50% rate Income Tax is a temporary measure. OK, that throws up a couple of points.

Last night I saw some Liberal Democrat blokey in Oldham and Saddleworth pointing out that the VAT rise was an unfortunate but necessary step taken reluctantly by the coalition, totally unforeseen by either party, prior to the election (which would explain why they both said they had no intention of raising VAT).

It was, said this blokey (whose name I didn’t get), on the BBC tea time news, all down to Labour leaving the country in such a terrible mess.

When pressed on the fact that the Liberals had said that they would not raise VAT, he said that they wouldn’t have done if they had been living in some parallel universe where the country’s finances weren’t in such a mess, but they hadn’t known about that before they won power. This begs the question, why was Vince Cable going on and on about the parlous state of the finances, indeed the only person to do that, if the Liberals didn’t think they were that bad?

Ideologically the Tories prefer a sales tax to a tax on income. Mrs Thatcher took VAT from 8% - 15% and reduced income tax in her first year in office. Mr Major put a further 2.5% on in 1991. In 1994 the Tories put an 8% VAT on domestic heating, which was reduced by Labour in 1997.

Before this election Mr Osborne said that his party had no intention of raising VAT, yet within a few weeks of taking up office he had announced his intention of making the standard rate 20% in order to pay down the deficit left by Labour. And now, on the first day of its operation, it has become a permanent feature.

Is this Osborne’s way of getting back the tax breaks for the criminally low paid under £10,000 a year, whom the Liberals have pushed them to exclude from tax over the next five years?

So to all the ordinary people who voted Conservative (or Liberal) you should be aware that unless you earn over £150,000 a year, you will be subsidising the rich with your increased VAT payment.

(As an afterthought, it is also a matter of not inconsiderable shame that it is likely that in a single week just before Christmas, while Mr Osborne was preparing to leave on that holiday, it is estimated that over 2,500 people in England and Wales died as a direct result of the cold. I have no comparable figures for Scotland, but last winter 2,900 people died of the cold.)

I hope you enjoyed Klosters Mr Osborne.

SO THIS IS WHERE IT ALL HAPPENS...

Subrosa tagged me on her blog with a challenge to describe my workspace; the place where the blog is written... and so, bearing in mind that Munguin (possibly Lord Munguin this time next year, if that tenner he sent to 'Call Me' didn’t get lost in the catastrophe that was the Christmas post/flurry of snow/new computer system launched in November!!!) is a media mogul of some stature in his own lunchtime, I set out do so....

Munguin Towers is designed on plans loaned to him by his close friend the Sheik of Dubai, and as you can see from the illustration, it’s coming along nicely!

Munguin's taste in furniture lacks an element of savoir faire, but what can you expect from a wee furry animal. He likes to be in the office no later than midday. Of course his office being on the top floor, there being no lifts at the moment, and him having rather short legs, there's a little problem with him only getting there in time to leave again, hence the lack of actual input from him!...

However, with the suave that you'd expect of Tristan, his office space reflects something a little more minimalist and er, understated...

The editorial and general dogsbody staff is accommodated in the less opulent but still comfortable surroundings of the lower floors. Here you can see them busily at work... er, well they were when Munguin passed through on his way to the ground floor 2 minutes ago...

The car park is spacious and reflects the duty of care that Munguin's Republic feels it owes its staff...

Alternatively... I work in a small, cluttered and rarely cleared desk in my bedroom, and Munguin from his lap top, on the bus!

*********

SOS MOZART

At long last Petula was honoured by an invitation to be the subject of "Vivement Dimanche", a sort of French version of "This is Your Life", but expanded to 90 minutes, shown at prime time, and including performances from anyone associated with the star, and in this case, the star herself.

This is her new French recording, written by Gilbert Bécaud and Pierre Delanoë, and produced by David Hadzis at Arthanor Studios in Geneva. I think she looks and sounds awesome for 78 years old.

Given that the links will attract a certain number of French readers, I've translated that brief text into French. Excuse the errors, please.

Enfin Petula a été honoré par une invitation d'être le sujet de « Vivement Dimanche », une sorte de version française de « This is Your Life », mais augmenté à 90 minutes, montré au temps principal, c'est-à-dire le Dimanche après midi. Ceci est son nouvel enregistrement français ecrit par Gilbert Bécaud et Pierre Delanoë, et produit par David Hadzis à Arthanor Studios, Genève. Je pense qu'elle reste toujours belle, très bien préservée et de belle voix pour une femme de 78 années.

(Je vous prie de m’excuser des fautes de langage…)

A Guid New Year to Ane An' A'

A guid new year to ane an' a'
An' mony may ye see,
An' during a' the years to come,
O happy may ye be.
An' may ye ne'er hae cause to mourn,
To sigh or shed a tear;
To ane an'a baith great an' sma'
A hearty guid new year.

Chorus
A guid new year to ane an' a'
An' mony may ye see,
An' during a' the years to come,
O happy may ye be.

2. O time flies past, he winna wait,
My friend for you or me,
He works his wonders day by day,
And onward still doth flee.
O wha can tell when ilka ane,
I see sae happy here,
Will meet again and merry be
Anither guid new year.

Chorus

3. We twa ha'e baith been happy lang.
We ran about the braes.
In yon wee cot beneath the tree,
We spent our early days.
We ran about the burnie's side,
The spot will aye be dear,
An'those that used to meet us there,
We'll think on mony a year.

Chorus

4. Noo let us hope our years may be
As guid as they ha'e been,
And trust we ne'er again may see,
The sorrows we ha'e seen.
And let us wish that ane an'a'
Our friends baith far an' near,
May aye enjoy in times to come -
A hearty guid new year!

Chorus

ROLL ON SPRINGTIME, FOR MORE REASONS THAN ONE

Prime Ministers and First Ministers always think of the glory (and attendant boost in popularity) when they manage to arrange or win a big event for their country. The Olympics and the Commonwealth Games are two obvious examples. They seem to draw the country together and push out the collective chest of England or Scotland. Ironically, even the loss of an event can foster patriotic feelings as happened in England when, despite Cameron’s shuttle diplomacy, England not only lost out, but did so in a spectacular style. Everyone from HRH William down to Bert in the pub was drawn together in collective hatred of FIFA whom, they all agreed were even more corrupt than the House of Lords!

Of course, once you have these things in place, you have to deliver. And there comes the payback. Costs rise 3 or 4 fold, security costs are probably double the cost of the event (although, conveniently, no one is allowed to know what we spend on security). Bit by bit the dirty deals become public and that transient popularity disappears like “sna affun a dyke”. You can be held to ransom by all manner of folks. Railway lines unfinished a week before the Queen is due to ride on the tracks to open the great event, are an embarrassment, and who knows what was paid to the people who had to get the Dome open on time.

So a few weeks ago Camerclegg was over the moon about the marriage of the Willie and Katie, which will doubtless cost enough to keep a hospital open for a year. The nation would be rejoicing; he promised us a holiday, although he quickly admitted it was the Queen who should pronounce on that, only to find out that it was in fact parliaments in all four countries which had to pronounce in it. He even appeared to have persuaded them to marry around the time of the General Elections in the Celtic countries and local elections in England, hopefully reducing the amount of coverage that these will get, and fostering a sense of joy and wellbeing.

If the individuals in the nation did not actually rejoice, as least the media rejoiced for them. The naysayers like me asked who would pay, and the answers came back that the Middletons and the Windsors would foot the bill (but not the security bill which will be in the hundreds of millions if not billions).

But now, of course, comes the downside. At a TUC meeting next month union bosses will make plans to take industrial action in protest at spending cuts between Easter, April 22 – 25, the royal wedding April 29 and the May Day bank holiday on May 2. A union spokesman said that the royal wedding would neither be targeted nor avoided. But we all know that it is the perfect time to cause disruption.

When the eyes of the world are upon England and London, with hundreds of thousands of tourists and more VIPs than you can shake a stick at, nothing will work! It’s a gift from the gods to unions.

TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: “This could well be the year that the country starts to say ‘No’ to Government in a way that they have not since middle Britain made a previous Conservative government abolish the poll tax.”

Whatever is coming in 2011, it will be a bumpy ride for the government of Davnik Cleggeron!

Pics: (1) The Happy Couple; (2) Brendan Barber, TUC; (3) Most people who protest are not militant; (4) Scene from the poll tax riots of March 1990s, the beginning of the end for Mrs T!!

NO MATTER HOW THEY MAKE YOU HAVE IT, YOU ABSOLUTELY SHALL HAVE A BIG SOCIETY

Apparently the government in London wants banks to ask people to make a donation to charity when they make a withdrawal of cash. Shops and restaurants could also ask people using a card to make a small donation, perhaps rounding up to the pound, under the proposals. Under legislation expected in the spring, people could be asked to give money when they fill in tax returns, apply for passports, driving licences and other state services (social security?).

So basically they will guilt you into making a charitable donation. And those who are a bit embarrassed about seeming mean will probably make a bigger contribution than they want to. A guy with his girlfriend may be persuaded that she would fancy him a bit more if he was generous rather than mean, whether or not he can afford it.

As so many things at priced at £x.99, people would feel incredibly embarrassed about donating a penny, so they might feel obliged to make it up to the nearest fiver! Do that in 5 shops every Saturday and see how you last till the end of the month.

Hilariously, the spur to encourage bigger donations will be that the donor would be rewarded with a letter from a Minister ....WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And National Lottery winners who contributed a large sum would be publicized on television...!

What? I thought that television channels decided what was publicized, not the government!

Francis Maude, the minister who will launch this idea, which is already operating in Mexico and Colombia, wishes to foster a culture of charitable giving. He wants to change social attitudes that encourage giving, which is strange, because the UK has an excellent record of giving to charity; in fact it is rated 8th most charitable nation in the world with 73% of people giving money a total of £10.6 billion per annum.

(Before we get too big headed, Britons are much less generous at donating their time by volunteering compared with many other countries possibly because we work longer hours than most other people.)

Mr Maude said: “If we can agree as a society the values that underpin helping each other we can unlock huge potential for a stronger, BIGGER society.” He said that he didn’t want to compel people to give, which is very very kind of him. But, you have to wonder, is it the next step?

Ministers apparently have concluded that individuals and businesses need to be reminded of the “warm glow” that results from helping others.

Oh have they?

How come we need to be reminded of that when 73% of the population already gives, and therefore presumably already feels the warm glow? Duh!

I actually checked my calendar when I read the article in the Telegraph. Was it, I wondered, April?

How bloody dare they? Like the majority of Scots I already make my charitable donations to organizations for which I have huge respect; organizations where I know that 100% of what I give will be used to help the target population.

I’d no more entrust my charitable giving to a bank, and thence the government, than I would paint the Scott Monument orange. Imagine entrusting your money to the Royal Bank of Scotland, or Tescos... for them to pass on to George Osborne!!! Yeah right!

They’ve come out with some halfwitted ideas so far; this just has to be the most insulting and ridiculous yet.

Pics: (1) The fabulous Scott Monument in Princes Street in Edinburgh. (2) Chuggers, or Charity Muggers in the street; they pick the vulnerable and won’t let them go till they have a donation. This will end up the same. (3) Francis Maude: If you had a son and the family name was Maude, would you call him a gender ambiguous name? Just a thought! (4) This kind of charity collection is intrusive, but easier to avoid if you don’t have faith in the organization, than being asked for a donation at the point of sale. (5) Maybe it would be better for Francis to encourage us to DO more rather than pay more. There is a far rosier glow from activity and that is where we have a shortfall on other countries.